House votes to allow hearsay in Drew Peterson case

November 20, 2008
By DAVE MCKINNEY,

DAN ROZEK AND JOE HOSEY

Chicago Sun Times Staff Reporters

Will County prosecutors on Wednesday received a new legal weapon they can use to investigate the murder of one of Drew Peterson’s wives and the disappearance of another.

But it’s not clear if the measure overwhelmingly approved by the Illinois House will lead to criminal charges against the former Bolingbrook police sergeant — or if the law will pass constitutional muster.

The change in state law allows prosecutors to use at trial so-called "hearsay" evidence from witnesses who may have been murdered by a defendant to stop them from testifying.

Pushed by Will County State’s Attorney James Glasgow, the new state law could apply to Peterson’s missing fourth wife, Stacy Peterson, who vanished from their home in October 2007. State Police have labeled Drew Peterson a suspect in his 23-year-old wife’s "potential homicide."
A minister has contended that Stacy Peterson told him Drew Peterson had killed his previous wife, Kathleen Savio.

The law might also come into play in Savio’s 2004 drowning death. She sent a letter to a prosecutor that said Peterson "knows how to manipulate the system, and his next step is to take my children away. Or kill me instead."

Glasgow insisted the law isn’t designed to target Drew Peterson or any specific individual, but said he intends to "aggressively" use the new measure. "I expect to use this law aggressively in any case where it applies," Glasgow said.

The new law left the 54-year-old Peterson unfazed as he prepared for a Will County court appearance Thursday on a gun charge stemming from a police search of his home after Stacy vanished.

"There’s rumors every time," Peterson said Wednesday, adding that he expects his court appearance to be nothing more than "another day in beautiful downtown Joliet."

The new law allows a judge to determine whether previous statements made by a murder victim could be admitted as trial evidence if prosecutors prove the defendant is responsible for the witness not being able to testify personally.

Because the Senate last week approved changes to the bill made by Gov. Blagojevich, the House action allows the legislation to take effect immediately.

Even before the law passed the House on a 109-0 vote with one representative voting 'present', Peterson’s name came up. Rep. Jack Franks (D-Woodstock) pressed the bill’s chief House sponsor, Rep. Coreen Gordon (D-Coal City), on whether the legislation related to the "fact pattern" of the Peterson case.

"I have no knowledge of that," Gordon replied. "When this bill becomes law, it would apply in every single case. It would apply to all victims."

The legislation is known as the "Drew Peterson bill" at the Statehouse. A GOP staff analysis goes so far as to say the legislation is "in response to the Drew Peterson case."

But its Democratic sponsors have walked on legislative eggshells to avoid linking the ex-cop’s name to the bill.

That likely is because of a provision in the state Constitution that bars the General Assembly from passing "special legislation" pertaining to an individual or a particular business.

The bill also could face challenges under the U.S. Constitution, where a recent decision seems to signal justices want to limit the use of most hearsay evidence, legal scholars said.

"We don’t really know what’s going to happen to it," said DePaul University law professor Leonard Cavise, who nonetheless noted there are "a whole raft" of exceptions to hearsay rules that have been deemed constitutional.

Stacy Peterson’s family supports the law, even if it isn’t used to prosecute Drew Peterson.
"Regardless of what happens to Drew Peterson, that’s a good law to pass," said Pam Bosco, a spokeswoman for Stacy Peterson’s family. "It’s good for everyone in Illinois to have a law like this.”